[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Problems with the documentation of Subversion dump format

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:41:33 -0500

On 12/14/2011 09:47 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Heh. Just to add to the confusion, Daniel says that what I'm calling a
> "flow" is elswehere called a "node" and that what I'm calling a "node"
> is elsewhere called a "node-revision".
> I'm not sure how I want to deal with this in the 0.3 draft. The
> problem with what he's telling me is the correct terminology leaves
> the term "node" pretty overloaded. Best thing may be to change "node"
> in the document to "node-revision" and leave in "flow" with a note
> indicating that the source code sometimes calls this a "node".


A "node-revision" is, in svn-fs-speak, a single node in the giant DAG which
describes the whole of the version history in the repository. It represents
the state of a file or directory as it existed a given point in version time.

A "node", though, is not a node in that DAG at all, but the term used to
describe a whole set of those nodes (aka "node-revisions") connected in the
DAG by their ancestor IDs. A "node" describes the line(s) of history of a
single versioned object (file, or directory, including all states thereof
including those resulting from copy operations).

So, yeah, one node is a "node-revision", and a collection of
"node-revisions" is a "node". We probably could have done a bit better when
naming this stuff...

Fortunately, there is no confusion about one thing: the term "flow" has not
a single meaning at all in Subversion-speak. :-)

C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

Received on 2011-12-14 16:42:10 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.